County counsel presents lower‑cost alternative to Best Best & Krieger for cemetery legal work; public speakers criticize current counsel

County counsel presented a comparison of legal services options to the Tulare Public Cemetery District on July 8, showing that in‑house Tulare County legal teams could deliver district legal work at substantially lower projected annual cost than the private law firm Best Best & Krieger (BBK).

The county presentation noted BBK’s general counsel rate for special‑district work, which the slide listed as $285 per hour, and said BBK had billed the district an average monthly cost of about $5,204.63 during the period the firm served the district. County counsel estimated projected annual legal costs under the BBK arrangement at about $62,455; county counsel projected county in‑house representation would cost roughly $36,008.60 annually for comparable coverage.

County counsel described a structure of legal teams available to the district — including resource teams for tax and property, a justice/employment and health division, protective services, and an in‑house litigation group — and said the county would identify the attorney with the most relevant experience (Tom Dane was named in the presentation as the deputy typically assigned to cemetery‑district matters).

Board members asked for clarification on recent legal spending and hours billed. County counsel said BBK billed roughly 120 hours advising the district during a seven‑month period and that the county’s rate schedule adopted July 1, 2025, is about half of the BBK hourly rate.

Several members of the public urged the board to return to county counsel. Alberto Aguilar, who said he had reviewed the district’s revised bylaws, recommended corrections related to Public Records Act citations and urged the board to note the printed names on bylaw signatures for transparency. Aguilar also criticized BBK’s handling of public‑records requests in blunt terms: “The attorney that the district has from Best Best and Krueger is, in my opinion, inept and unhonest,” he told the board. Anna Limon said she had sought her mother’s records and had not received them; she said BBK staff told her records had been provided when she had not received them.

Other speakers, including former trustee Xavier Abla, said he supported returning to county counsel largely for cost reasons and continuity. County counsel framed the presentation as informational; the board did not take immediate formal action to change counsel during the July 8 meeting.

The presentation and the public comments together drew attention to two issues that trustees said they would monitor closely: the district’s existing outside counsel arrangements and the timeliness and completeness of public‑records responses. The board asked staff to continue to track legal expenses and to brief trustees on any recommended changes to counsel or scope of services.